Building Institutions for Groundwater Governance in Andhra Pradesh, India

Ruth Meinzen-Dick1, Rahul Chaturvedi2, Laia Domenech1, Rucha Ghate,3 Marco Janssen,4 Nathan Rollins4

1 International Food Policy Research Institute2 Foundation for Ecological Security

3 ICIMOD4 Arizona State University

Funded by CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems

Stimulating self-governance• Anecdotes that playing field experiments and

debriefing with community lead to changes in governance.

• With IFPRI and Indian NGOs study in 29 villages in Andhra Pradesh.

• Groundwater games (ongoing measurement ground water levels).

• We don’t say what to do.

2

Foundation for Ecological Security• Works with more than

8000 villages.• Provide guidance on

restoration of commons.• Communities are

effective in solving their own problems.

• Challenges due to external forces (mining, modernity)

3

Groundwater Use in India• Groundwater in India accounts for more than:– 60% of irrigated agriculture, 80% of drinking water

(World Bank, 2010)

• Increased GW Use, aquifers overdrafted• Challenging resource dilemma– Hidden from view

• Responses– Watershed recharge– Reduce GW use

• Community crop budgets

Instruments of the Project

• Groundwater CPR Game

• Community-wide Debriefing Meeting

• Household Survey

• Village Attributes Form

Treatments• 2 Treatments (20 villages)– Treatment 1 (10 villages)

• Participants receive cash payment based on performance in experiment (Avg payment around 1 day’s wages)

– Treatment 2 (10 villages)• Participants do not receive cash payments• A flat-fee payment is made to the village (via watershed

committee)

– Control Group (9 villages)• Household & Village Attributes Surveys only

– In each treatment village, 1 group with women, 1 with men

Groundwater CPR Game

Group of 5 Participants2 games of 10 rounds (“years”) Each game begins with 50 units of

groundwater availableEach round, participants choose crop:◦ A: Lower Income, Lower Water-Demand◦ B: Higher Income, Higher Water-Demand

Groundwater recharge 5 units after each roundFirst game no communication; Second game with

communication

Community Debriefing

Full village invited

Basics of game described

Share general game results◦ No specifics about individuals

Engage community in discussions about◦ How this relates to own experiences and challenges farming◦ Lessons and insights the participants gained from the

experience◦ Possible solutions

Ground water levels

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Water remaining

Round

Results statistical analysis

• Significant effects:– Years in the program of NGO (-), Education (-),

Collective action (-), Area owned (-), Irrigator (+)

• Insignificant effects:– Flat fee, Communication, Sex, Age, Caste

• Return visits:– 1.5 years after experiments return visits were

performed.– Measurements of mental models, interviews and

surveys, ground water measurements.

12

Preliminary Insights return visits

• Part of Participants indicated to look at monetary outcomes.

• Difficulty to measure impact

• Examples of changes in strategies.

• People start putting groundwater issues on the agenda.

Co-developing new versions of game

• Co-developing new versions of game:– Quality of drinking water

– Including rainfall variability

• Scaling up use of games as participatory tool

• Other games (forestry, rangelands)

Discussion

• Games lead to vivid experience of collective action challenges.

• Neutral place to discuss collective action problems.

• Challenge mental models

• Resource for practitioners (protocols, tutorial; www.gamesforsustainability.org)

Thank You